A couple of lights on the bill of rights
Amendment IV
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. ”
Imagine driving to the store, and an over ambitious police officer decide to pull you over because he sees you are black, or your hair is too long and searches your vehicle and your personal belongings because your breath smells of a cigarette …
The police must have a compelling reason to pull you over. At one time they used defective equipment excuses, but now, the excuse that they couldn’t tell if you were wearing your seat belt is an even more plausible excuse. When the law was originally enacted in the state of Michigan, it was stated clearly; “that no vehicle shall be detained solely for the purpose of verifying seat belt use..” <paraphrased> However, as most restrictive laws are enacted it was simply a sort creep away from reality.
Aside from the possibilities of constitutional violations, is the plain and simple fact that the personal choices which have no direct affect on others are rights reserved and protected by the 9th amendment as well. As human beings, we have no rights to infringe upon the rights of others, and the controlling aspects of this behavior run contrary to the language:
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. ”
The right to free movement. The right to personal control, etc…
This is not to argue the logic of seatbelt use.. The statistic bear out the fact that seatbelt use increases the chance of survival in the event of an accident, but the threat of the use of force (follow it logically) to make you use the seatbelts remains immoral at best.

Feel Free to comment!